Patton: Blemishes on the Sport of Soccer

I am thrilled that he addressed the fact that Kampmeinert was not eligible to ref the match.

In the interest of such a big story, I am going to post his column here. The Newspress is a great paper, and if you subscribe, you may enjoy Patton gems like this one:

Blemishes on the sport of soccer

By MARK PATTON NEWS-PRESS SENIOR WRITER

Mark Patton

November 23, 2010 5:36 AM

The finishing touches are being applied to UCSB's Harder Stadium for soccer's College Cup, which will begin in just 18 days.

The new scoreboard is being hooked up. The final paving
stones are being laid at the new Curtis Gate. The remodeled press box
and new concession stand are being outfitted.

Everything's getting handled except the extensive rust that corrodes the infrastructure of the 44-year-old stadium.

I say leave it. Embrace it as a symbol. Display it as a
monument to the neglect that the NCAA continues to show for the sport of
soccer.

It runs a cheap, antiquated championship for the world's most popular sport.

UCSB's Cup won't runneth over for the Gauchos after several
questionable decisions by an inexperienced referee cost them dearly in
Sunday's 2-1, overtime defeat at California in the second round of the
National Championships.

The NCAA should have paid to bring in a top referee. How Mike
Kampmeinert of Sacramento ended up with Sunday's officiating assignment
has both baffled and infuriated UCSB officials.

Their check of game summaries this season shows that
Kampmeinert has served as the center official in just a couple of NCAA
women's games. He's worked only the sidelines in two Division 1 men's
contests.

That fact shows that the Pac-10 assigner who got Kampmeinert
to officiate the match violated this portion of the NCAA's own 2010
handbook:

"Policies and Selection of Officials. For the Division I
men's soccer championship, an official is required to work a minimum of
six regular-season Division I men's soccer games in order to be eligible
to work any round(s) of the championship."

Kampmeinert's game-turning decisions included:

1 — A red-card ejection of UCSB midfielder Luis Silva for
allegedly sliding into Cal's Servando Carrasco at midfield with his
cleats high with 20:48 still left in the first half, forcing the Gauchos
to play shorthanded for more than 78 minutes.

2 — Only a yellow-card warning for Carrasco after he
responded to the tackle by striking Silva in the head — a decision which
allowed the Bears to maintain a one-player advantage over the Gauchos.

3 — A hand-ball call in the 18-yard box against UCSB's Chris
Hunter, giving Carrasco a game-tying penalty kick with just 1:40 left in
regulation.

4 — A non-call of an apparent hand-ball violation by Cal on a
shot by Michael Tetteh near the end of overtime, just before Davis Paul
made the game-winning shot for the Bears with :02 on the clock.

A review of the game tape — something that would prevent
these kind of controversies if the NCAA invested in instant replay —
showed that Kampmeinert was correct on only one of those four decisions.

1 — Bad call: Silva slid with his cleats down on a 50-50 play, striking the ball before pushing it hard onto Carrasco's leg.

2 — Ball non-call: Carrasco kept his footing despite the
collision, and then used an open palm to strike Silva in the side of the
Gaucho's head as he tried to stand up. The NCAA handbook's section on
fouls and misconduct stipulates that a player should be ejected if he
"is guilty of violent behavior."

3 — Good call: Hunter did touch the ball with his hand inside the 18-yard box on a long service by Cal's Demetrius Omphroy.

4 — Bad non-call: A Cal player clearly touched a shot by
UCSB's Michael Tetteh with his hand inside the 18-yard box, and the
Gauchos should have been awarded a penalty shot in the final minute of
overtime.

NCAA officials are reviewing this same tape, although not to give UCSB any chance at a reversal. The result is official.

Yet to be decided are penalties against the Gauchos — most
notably, starters Danny Barrera, Machael David and Tetteh — for
confronting Kampmeinert after the match.

UCSB coach Tim Vom Steeg, who spent much of his post-game
media conference criticizing the NCAA's method of assigning officials,
kept mum on the subject on Monday.

Athletic director Mark Massari did release a statement which said:

"As a department we are thoroughly investigating the
post-game actions of our student-athletes and staff. Once all video and
input is reviewed, I will take the appropriate actions guided by
sportsmanship, codes of conduct and general expectations of behavior.

"This match leaves many tough questions to be asked, through
the proper system and process, on how officials are assigned and
selected to work at this stage in the season when so much is at stake.

"However, although we are driven by championships, emotion
and passion at UCSB, our student-athletes, coaches and staff will — at
all times — display behavior that represents the university in nothing
but a positive light. We have high standards in how we win, how we lose,
and how we represent this incredible university. We did not do that
post-match."

Hopefully, all those who wield power during this process —
the NCAA as well as the UCSB administration — consider the circumstances
and unfairness of the situation while passing judgment on these Gauchos
and their coaches.

A cold, steely approach will only further taint a situation that is as ugly as the corroded metal of Harder Stadium.

In the first half, Cal fouled a Gaucho very hard just inside our attacking half. Kampmeinert allowed the play to continue which entailed a scoring opportunity... I want to say we were on a 2-on-1 or 3-on-2. Instead, he ignores the advantage rule and blows the whistle as we're nearing the penalty box and brings the ball all the way back toward midfield and awards the Cal player a yellow. Inexplicable.

It's astounding that somebody so unqualified would be assigned to a game in the championship tournament. The sad thing is that if it wasn't us (or one of the handful of other schools where people pay attention), nobody would give a damn. I guarantee this sort of thing has happened before, and the NCAA has swept it under the rug. If it was just a referee having a bad day, okay, it happens. It sucks, but it happens. If it's an unqualified referee having a bad day...that's completely different because he shouldn't have been out there in the first place.

Somehow I get the feeling the referee assignor's argument will be that he's done 6 NCAA DI men's games in his lifetime, so he was qualified (the rules don't say that the games have to be in the season preceding the championship, so if he centered 6 games 10 years ago, and none since, they can say he's qualified). And somehow I get the feeling that the NCAA will accept that and dismiss everything else.

Gaucho Bandsman wrote:
Somehow I get the feeling the referee assignor's argument will be that he's done 6 NCAA DI men's games in his lifetime, so he was qualified (the rules don't say that the games have to be in the season preceding the championship, so if he centered 6 games 10 years ago, and none since, they can say he's qualified). And somehow I get the feeling that the NCAA will accept that and dismiss everything else.

The handbook consistently speaks in terms of that given season, including card accumulation rules, etc. Sure, it's not spelled out specifically, but any reasonable person would deduce that it means 6 matches in a season. Otherwise, you could dust off a 90 year old ref who hasn't done a match in 30 years and proclaim he is qualified when he clearly is not.

"Policies and Selection of Officials. For the Division I men's soccer championship, an official is required to work a minimum of six regular-season Division I men's soccer games in order to be eligible to work any round(s) of the championship."

The phrase I italicized is in present tense which further suggests it to be for the current season.

Taken literally, there is the smallest room for interpretation, but any reasonable interpretation would be for the current season. No doubt in my mind. If the NCAA attempts to spin it any other way, they are hiding from the issue.

So we've found and debated over this rule. How sure are we that discussion of it is being included in whatever review the NCAA is conducting? TVS probably has better things to do than pore over NCAA policy handbooks all day.

OCGaucho wrote:So we've found and debated over this rule. How sure are we that discussion of it is being included in whatever review the NCAA is conducting? TVS probably has better things to do than pore over NCAA policy handbooks all day.

If Patton wrote an article on it, I'm pretty sure Athletics know about it and that they would have included it in any protest/official complaint.